Discussion in 'Lucasfilm Ltd. In-Depth Discussion' started by malducin, Feb 12, 2002.
For Pearl Harbor and AI, also LOTR nominated. Congratulations.
I wonder who gets the Oscar for best animated feature. I'm not sure who I want to win... Shrek was awesome, I loved it so much, and saw it four times in the theater. On the other hand, I just watched Monsters Inc. twice, and I loved it too... I'm a huge fan of Pixar. And they have the better audio-commentaries on their DVDs *g*. So I want them both to win... arrrgh!
ILM get TWO nominations and everyone else is overlooked? Urgh.
And they say it aint rigged.
ILM's Pearl Harbor gets a nomination, but Double Negative's VASTLY SUPERIOR CG WW2 plane work on Captain Corelli and Enemy at the Gates goes COMPLETELY without consideration??!!
What a JOKE.
I don't really get what you are reffering. If you actually think I'm overlooking, no not really. I'm actually organizing something for a website:
[link=http://www.vfxfan.com/awards/vfxfan/2001/index.html]VFXfan Awards 2001[/link]
I just stayed on-topic on this board. If I had just mentioned LOTR, it would be a little off-topic.
I'm sure you are aware of the bake-off and of course that is a much better overview of last years work. I do agree that I was shocked that Enemy at the Gates was overlooked. Captain Correlli was a much smaller FX show. But Enemy at the Gates was fantastic, not only DNeg but also DawWerk. To me it was much more viable for a bake-off than say maybe fast and Furious or Black Hawk Down. Then again the branch is composed or their peers, so who knows exactly what they saw.
I don't see why you say the planes of Enemy at the gates was vastly superior, any facts or reasoning you want to poit out or just a blanket statement. I'll do the same and respectfully disagree, the quality in PH was astounding, not saying that DNeg's was bad but for several reaons I think ILM had little of an edge.
Funny story, the guys from DNeg and ILM had back to back presentations on their work on those 2 films last SIGGRAPH. After the event they both each congratulated each other. The guys from ILM congratulating the ones from DNeg for their amazing stuff and likewise the guys from Dneg gushing over ILM's work.
the Bakeoff is decided by their peers, now the final winner is an entirely different matter.
If I were to decide, I would probably say A.I. because of ILM's new revolutionary realtime compositing software (that lets you see the results, motion tracked and everything, while you shoot). However, that probably isn't taken into account when judging.
I have a feeling this will be a repeat of last year and 1999, when a smaller FX house gets the award over ILM (though undeservedly ie. Gladiator and The Matrix).
Lord of the Rings will probably get it, but for some strange reason, I have a big problem with a movie that blatantly changes the color of a shot to blend the CG rather than change the CG to blend with the shot.
I do not think LOTR deserves to win, but they probably will.
Well the official rules for picking the winner can be found at the Academy site:
[link=http://www3.oscars.org/74academyawards/rules/index.html]Academy Awards rules[/link]
Unless you are referring to the one for the bake-off which are very similar. The overall work is judged though.
The system you are referring to was used as a pre-viz tool, to let Spielberg, actors and crew members see what the final frame might look like. The final compositing was done much later and with other tools. They had another one that ran on a laptop for planning shots that used the Unreal engine. Though at least one is already a winner: MARS, which was used on AI, was awarded a Tech Oscar (Steve Sullivan and Eric Schafer).